Warranty / Mods

[DuncanR]

The driver. Epic fail. :hahaha:

Cock !

:hahaha:

Cock !

A new engine!? What failed out of interest?

It spun a shell Stevie, Im afraid my driving ability clearly suppased the Engineering genius of the German Design team !:supz:...

It just happened, no secondary reason like low oil, or failed oil pump, or pressure relief valve...it was just that engines ...time to let go ...and move on ...:bigcry:

[Bounce]

It spun a shell Stevie, Im afraid my driving ability clearly suppased the Engineering genius of the German Design team !...:bigcry:[/quote]:hahaha::hahaha::thumbs:

[DuncanR]

I would opt for the BMW warranty ... tick the box BEFORE you put those mods on, :whistle: ...so to speak, so that you are being honest at the time of filling the application form out , and wont therefore subject yourself to any soul searching should you eventually have to make a claim for ..say .. a new engine ? Take said car to a certain dealership well documented on this forum as having the most experience in dealing with all things CSL !

Case of Tetaka v BMW Canada Inc. is interesting full details here.

http://www.internationallawoffice.com/newsletters/detail.aspx?g=8d3d08e8-bb74-40ca-851e-4088de833f9d

Main point here, they did appeal the case, but they still paid out under warranty.

Facts
BMW manufactured the BMW M5 car which was leased by the plaintiff. Shortly after leasing the vehicle, the plaintiff had extensive modifications carried out on the car, which were neither approved nor installed by BMW. These modifications included the installation of a stereo and DVD system, an in-dashboard television, a multi-function remote control and a variety of other items intended to enhance the performance of the vehicle. The plaintiff drove the modified vehicle for a number of months without incident. However, one day when the plaintiff was driving the car the driver's airbag and side impact head protection spontaneously deployed.
The plaintiff subsequently took the car to BMW for repair. BMW refused to replace the airbags under the warranty on the basis that the modifications to the vehicle may have contributed to the improper deployment of the airbags. The plaintiff then launched an action against BMW, claiming damages for negligence and breach of warranty.
The warranty agreement at issue was composed of a number of paragraphs, including a general coverage provision which warranted that the vehicle was free of defects in material or workmanship, and that coverage under the warranty required the vehicle to be brought to the workshop of an authorized BMW dealer upon discovery of a defect in the material or workmanship.The warranty also contained a number of exclusions. One paragraph provided that the warranty did not apply to modifications of the vehicle or the installation of any performance accessories or components which altered the original engineering or operating specifications. Another paragraph provided that BMW would accept no liability for parts or accessories that it had not approved.

Trial Decision
The trial judge dismissed the plaintiff's negligence claim and held that there had been a breach of warranty. He ordered BMW to pay for the cost of the airbag repairs.
In reaching this decision the trial judge found that the exemption clause concerning modifications in BMW's warranty agreement was "poorly drafted" and "ambiguous". In his view, the liability exemption clause was reasonably capable of having one of two interpretations. The first interpretation - the one argued by the plaintiff - was that the warranty excluded repairs on non-BMW after-market accessories that were not approved, manufactured or installed by BMW. The second interpretation - and one advocated by BMW - was that the warranty did not apply to performance accessories or components that had been installed or attached to the vehicle which resulted in damage to the original components. Applying the contra proferentem principle, the trial judge interpreted the liability exclusion clause in favour of the plaintiff, as applying only to accessories or components added to the vehicle that were not approved by BMW, such that the airbags at issue remained covered under the warranty.
The trial judge went on to find that the deployment of the airbags, in the absence of a collision, was a 'defect' within the meaning of the warranty. He noted that the warranty covered defects without any limitation as to how they were caused, even if the evidence did not permit their precise determination, unless they were otherwise excluded by a liability exclusion clause. The trial judge was therefore satisfied that the plaintiff had shown that the warranty did apply and that BMW should have repaired the airbags. The plaintiff was accordingly awarded the cost of those repairs.


In the final notes of the appeal, the Judge made this interesting point with regard to proving who was responsible for the defect.

"Rather, the burden is on the plaintiff (me & you) to prove that the defect was caused by the defendant's (BMW in this case) conduct within the terms of the warranty. " How would that be possible to do, if the only diagnostics software/hardware was available from BMW ???

Food for thought should someone want to take the mighty BMW on in the UK !

Yours
CSL Miami

[AlexGTT]

Cock !


Cock !

:hahaha::thumbs:

[_Nathan_]

Dunc - that airbag thing is interesting as a member on here had an airbag beploy on the motorway for no reason and BMW refused to help out as the suspension was modified.

[Bealo]

Nothing but good things to say about the BMW warranty.

Infact i feel it is that good and issue free that it would steer me towards having another BMW in the future :thumbs:

[bromers]

I must say that i disagree with you there bromers. It's now pretty well known that you have not had a good experience of BMW warranty but i do believe that your experience is an isolated one tbh.

Personally i have had good experience with BMW and their warranty - and my car is modified 'considerably'. There are plenty of others on here who have similar experience of BMW warranty - like me, their cars are also modified...

At the end of the day as i have said in other threads; it depends which dealer you take the car to as some are clearly better than others when it comes to warranty claims... :whistle:

Guybrush - Evidence of good BMW warranty service is on this forum in many other threads. I personally wouldn't entertain an independent warranty from elsewhere.

..and no - i don't work for BMW Warranty services :hahaha:

My very recent impressions were that they were really clamping down on claims. If your car is modified and the dealer doesn't declare them to Mondial or Head Office then it is fine, for what it's worth my hadn't, but you are always running the risk that they will reject a claim. The warranty T&C's quote it and they can use them against you.

And from another thread in here there's no BMW goodwill anymore on cars this age.

I would be really interested to know if a 3rd party warranty would of paid out though.

[DuncanR]

Dunc - that airbag thing is interesting as a member on here had an airbag beploy on the motorway for no reason and BMW refused to help out as the suspension was modified.

And that was the point being made in the court case, taking things to the extreme, IF you fitted an after market snazzy interior mirror, how the fook would that be a contributable cause to early airbag deployment ??
Maybe said member should do a little more research on the subject.:whistle: ... here perhaps ? http://www.autoforumz.com/Series-E39...pict98451.html

[Dan_csl]

i had an independant warranty for 2 years, never claimed but in that time BMW gave me a new gearbox and clutch/flywheel on Goodwill:thumbs:

Fuckers! I've just been told today that even though I have the Comprehensive Warranty with BMW, potentially my clutch slur isn't covered as there's some sort of exclusion on the clutch, can't fucking believe it!? :banghead: :banghead:

[DazBlackCSL]

Nothing but good things to say about the BMW warranty.

Infact i feel it is that good and issue free that it would steer me towards having another BMW in the future :thumbs:

[Thorney]

THe Canadian case will have no bearing on UK law as different legal system, however Canadian law is in part based on the UK's judicial system so could be at least referred to (BMW would strive to have it exlcuded of course).

However the point they make (and is referred to since) is that BMW's main case was that they said the modification 'caused' the issue but as the only people who can ascertain the 'cause' is BMW then the onus of proof is on them as only they have the facitlies to measure it so BMW are in a difficult situation, either open up their diagnostic systems to third parties (which they should do under EU law but invariably make it difficult) or accept that push comes to shove they will have to pay out in such circumstances.

[_Nathan_]

Fuckers! I've just been told today that even though I have the Comprehensive Warranty with BMW, potentially my clutch slur isn't covered as there's some sort of exclusion on the clutch, can't fucking believe it!? :banghead: :banghead:

This has always been the case, it is a wearing friction part.

If they take it out and the clutch itself isn't worn then warrenty should cover, but all depends on how the dealer involved relays information and how well they understand the normal issues the CSL suffers.

[Franco]

Dont sound cheap Dan!

[Dan_csl]

This has always been the case, it is a wearing friction part.

If they take it out and the clutch itself isn't worn then warrenty should cover, but all depends on how the dealer involved relays information and how well they understand the normal issues the CSL suffers.

The dealer is very aware of the situation, it's in at our favourite place Nathan, the trouble is it's the best part of £650 labour just to take the gearbox out and then it still might not be covered dependent on what they find! Catch 22 now and it's the main thing I wanted sorted with the bloody car! :bigcry: :banghead:

Dont sound cheap Dan!

As above mate... :whistle:

[Franco]

OUCH!